by Joe Mccarthy

Created on: January 20, 2008

Out of the two, air pollution and smoking, I, like most people, would consider smoking a greater risk for cancer. The first point that comes to mind is simply this: The lungs of nonsmokers are affected by air pollution. The lungs of smokers are affected by pollution and smoking.

With that said, there remains the subject of "second hand smoke." At first glance you would assume that this means nonsmokers are also affected by both pollution and cigarettes. But by what degree. Ventillation lessens the risk for nonsmokers because they are not taking the direct hit into their lungs like the smoker is. Read most household products that contain harmful chemicals and you will be informed to "use in a well ventallated area." Far more smokers die from lung cancer than nonsmokers from second hand smoke. The notion of second hand smoke does not mean pollution and cigarettes are an equal risk for cancer. That would be true, of course, if the nonsmoker were to climb a ladder and take a direct hit from a smokestack on a continuous daily basis.

Even using a score card, the smoker still strikes out. The non-smoker is subjected to: 1. Air pollution, 2. Second-hand smoke. The smoker is subjected to, 1. air pollution, 2. smoking, 3. second-hand smoke.

Pollution is prevalent in some areas more than others. But no matter where on this planet you place these two people, whether it's in a smog filled city, the desert, the arctic region, a national park, or on a cruiser in the middle of the ocean, the smoker has that extra strike against him by constantly filling his lungs with a full strength pollutant. He literally becomes a smokestack.

However, my arguement only supports the idea that the PERSON is at greater risk of cancer when they smoke; not that SMOKING causes more cancer than POLLUTION, or visa versa. The only way you could prove that is by separating the two. You would need two worlds; one where there was no tobacco, just pollution, and another planet were there was smokers but no other kind of pollution. Unless, of course, you're satisfied with the idea that most people who get lung cancer are smokers or were at some time in their life.

Learn more about this author, Joe Mccarthy.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.